FIRE

[AustrianSep]

if one engine burns and you start an emergency landing
how to call the firedepartement or fire cars or someshing els
please help

[ashaman]

It's very simple actually.

You can't.

Real emergencies were never modeled in no version of FS.

As real as it gets.

[AustrianSep]

but why in one missio the co-pilot say: the emergency team is waitinf for us

[ashaman]

It may be a mission add-on. Can't really say, as I never use those. Try looking into the specifics of the mission.

Surely FS has no emergency management.

[Mobius]

The missions have situation-specific vehicles and radio-communications that only work in the missions, so if you want to model an emergency, the missions have many different situations you can try, but you can't do those things in free-flight.


More real than anything else you can get.

[RitterKreuz]

in real life declaring an emergency is a nice little mess that may be modeled into the next version who knows?

but there is more involved with declaring an emergency than "rolling the trucks" and landing the plane.

A few weeks ago when we were on the arrival into DFW an aircraft ahead of us declared an emergency - i dont recall the cause of their problem - it was nothing too fantastic but their declaration was justified... here is a sample of what FS ATC  would then be faced with.

1. We were placed in holding for an hour and 10 minutes while things got straightened out. Just about every airliner on arrival into the airport was placed into holding as well. Stacked from about 6K up to 18K at various holding fixes.

2. Aircraft that were on the ground at other airports who had DFW as their destination were "ground stopped" its nice when you board everyone up and taxi out and ground control in houston says "Hey landmark 123 heavy there has been a ground stop initiated in DFW due to an aircraft with an emergency, your new ETD is 1900 hours... time now 1730 hours, you can taxi onto taxiway charlie and shut down the engines if you would like to wait there but i will keep you updated every 30 minutes"  :-/

3. The emergency aircraft is handled with priority over all others... some other planes manage to get into DFW but at a slow trickle of perhaps 1 every 5 minutes.

4. next problem is that a lot of the aircraft in holding have already cut into their holding fuel and because of the low fuel begin diverting to airports that they CAN get into... Oklahoma City OK, Abilene TX, Dallas Love Field,. they get on the ground and receive fuel but then they are ground stopped until they emergency is dealt with and everything can return to normal

Airlines call this "OSO" (off schedule operations) Usually when OSO happens the entire airlines schedule wont catch up to normal until mid day the NEXT day. because there are crew legalities when getting the required hours at the overnight, departure times in the morning have to be extended by 1 or 2 or 3 hours sometimes.

so in someone's declaration of an emergency in MSFS at least some aspects of the above would have to be simulated into the FSX or FS11 ATC programming at least for several of the large airports. unless you plan on declaring an emergency into a small rural airport - which wont even have a fire department on the field... thats right, most small airports depend on local fire rescue in the city to respond to aircraft related emergencies... thats why i used to tell my students, if you have an emergency that allows you to divert - go for a larger controlled airport unless its an immediate life or death situation like a passenger with a heart attack or something.

sounds like a really fun programming job for some FS developer team at MS.  ;D

and yes - there are fire trucks and ambulances on some emergency missions in FSX - just not available in "free flight".

[ashaman]

There was a post some days ago that modeled a very simple yet effective mock emergency situation that would be perfect for FS, as I'm unable to find said post, I'll try to repeat here what was written there without adding too much of mine (or maybe not 8-)). Should the author of that post read this... sorry. I tried to find your post to link it, but was unable to find it.

Given that in FS (perhaps XXV) maybe it will be modeled a less stupid way to have an emergency in flight than what we have today, a communication of priority landing with the tower could go with the simulated plane launching a Mayday or a PAN with the ATC window perhaps with a submenu from which to choose the emergency to declare, for maximum realism.

The ATC from ground would then vector or give a general idea (Like: "The nearest airport from your position is a 4 o' clock, 35 miles" or something) of the nearest airport capable of having that plane landing in it (it would be exceedingly stupid to send a 777 to land on a private strip), while at the same time suspending all AI activity on that airport.

Further, for added realism the tower could ask the plane launching the mayday or the PAN if the pilot wants the trucks deployed (it would not be a good idea if the simulated emergency was a medical one, in which care a single ambulance could be deployed instead) and then clear the plane to land on the runway closer to its actual position (winds allowing). For the lovers of "graphics at all costs" it could be made so an animation of trucks and vehicles ("Airplane" style perhaps ) could move in position to "assist" the landing plane too.


All this I resumed above, or something similar, is not a lot to add to a future release, and would give a lot more depth to FS, shame that in M$ have other necessities.

[RitterKreuz]

yep, its fine you can quote it if you like, that was my post  ;D

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2 ... 80032879/0 (about 8 posts down)

this could be done with FS9 or FSX but the problem you run into is what to do with all the other aircraft if you are declaring an emergency into SeaTac or Chicago, or DFW or JFK etc.

i suppose all of the airborne aircraft could just go invisible until you landed - but then there would be people who would cry and complain about how "unrealistic" that is.  ::)

[ashaman]

It would be one hell of a lot more realistic than what is now anyway. :-/

It necessitates not that is perfect, but that is better. That's my pet peeve with FSX. FSX is NOT better than FS9, if not under the graphics department, and that is quite a weak point in my book.

Graphics with no substance == Smoke with no roast.